[[Template:list helper]]

Jump to: navigation, search

Where was the RFDO for this?

Yair rand (talk)18:55, 30 December 2012

There is none yet because it is still being orphaned. But there was a discussion Template:list:days of the week/yi and before that too.

CodeCat19:03, 30 December 2012

You're supposed to have an RFDO before orphaning and deprecating a template, not after.

Yair rand (talk)19:10, 30 December 2012

It has happened to me before that people said "keep, still in use". Besides, there already is consensus for deprecating it so why?

CodeCat19:11, 30 December 2012

Where was this consensus? Discussion on deprecating and deleting templates is supposed to happen at RFDO. A response of "keep, still in use" to a request to orphan and delete is not appropriate.

Yair rand (talk)19:15, 30 December 2012

Sorry I pasted the wrong link. The one I meant was WT:Grease pit/2012/December#Template:list:days of the week/yi, which itself links to WT:Grease pit/2012/November#Expanding the list templates.

CodeCat19:20, 30 December 2012

That doesn't at all look like consensus to delete this major template. I think there should be an RFDO about this.

Yair rand (talk)19:26, 30 December 2012

It's not a concensus to delete it, just a consensus to replace it. It will be RFDOed once it's no longer needed.

CodeCat19:28, 30 December 2012

I'm sorry, but this isn't making any sense to me at all. What exactly do you think RFDO is for? Routine clearing out of orphaned templates and categories?

Yair rand (talk)19:33, 30 December 2012

Yes? I see it more as "making sure that nobody has a problem with deleting it". That's how most people seem to use it. I recall that {{Xyzy}} failed RFDO but because it was never orphaned, it was never deleted, and it's still hanging around. I generally go to BP or GP when it comes to changes that don't involve deletion, like the one that's being made now.

CodeCat19:40, 30 December 2012

I see. As you may have noticed, many of the items currently listed at RFDO are still very much in use, and the discussions are mostly about whether the templates or categories should be used. This indicates that your view of RFDO is not universally accepted. Perhaps there should be a discussion in the Beer parlour about the purpose of RFDO?

Yair rand (talk)19:49, 30 December 2012

Why stand on ceremony? Everyone who was reading the GP and cared enough to comment supported the notion, if I remember correctly. Essentially, the people at RFDO and at the GP are more or less an identical crowd, and unless there's a good reason to keep things the way they were that I'm simply too thick to see (and that's a distinct possibility), I don't get why this is a problem.

Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds20:15, 30 December 2012
 

I've started Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2013/January#Purpose of RFDO to clarify what the purpose of RFDO is and whether an RFDO is necessary before the template is deprecated and orphaned. (For the record, I support keeping the template.)

Yair rand (talk)16:53, 1 January 2013